"Finding" a Balance

*Disclaimer: I mention in this entry that I work at Boston.com, and how some of our content ends up on the site. As should be obvious, my views do not necessarily represent those of Boston.com.

Last week I began an internship at Boston.com, the website for The Boston Globe. As part of my duties there, I sift through wire photos to create photo galleries. Photos come to us from places like the AP with fairly basic captions: what's happening, who's in the photo, where the photo was taken, who took the photo, and when it was taken.

Our job as web producers is to edit that info down and sharpen it. We also fix spelling errors and make sure the captions follow Globe style (verbs in past tense, etc.). Our thinking is this: On one hand, the photographer was there and knows what was going on; on the other, photographers aren't professional writers. As such, sentences can usually be rearranged, shortened, or clarified for easier reading. We also run into multiple pictures with the same caption, so we have to find other info to present to the reader/viewer to keep the gallery interesting.

I mention this because I worked on a gallery of "looting" in the Katrina aftermath, and given the current controversy over AP photos, I feel I should explain some of the thought that went into our gallery. The controversy, if you don't feel like clicking through to the article, is that in one AP photo, white people were said to be "finding bread and soda from a local store," while a black man in a very similar AP photo was "looting a grocery store." For the record, we did not use either photo in our "looting" gallery.

First and foremost, it's impossible to tell with absolute certainty that any photo shows someone looting. Any photo could have any explanation. In these pics, all parties could have purchased the items or gotten them from relief workers. In other pics, people could be running from, or even just running near, police for any number of reasons. On the flip side, anyone could be made to look like a looter. A person resting on a lawn chair could be "area woman rests after looting store." A person crying could be "area man feels remorse after looting store." And so on.

Ergo, we tried to be as specific as possible in our captions. People "removed items" and "jumped through windows as police arrived." All of which suggests looting, but given the photo and caption we're given, it's the most accurate info we have. We even (at my suggestion—my only real contribution to the project) changed the name of the gallery to remove the word "looting" from the title. The final title was "Area stores stripped of merchandise."

So, as I read about the controversy, I felt proud of myself for averting a potential crisis. Until I checked the site again before writing this and saw that the one word slug for our gallery was "looting."

Nuts.

Post-Katrina "looting" is a classic ethical scenario: Should you steal a loaf of bread to feed your family? How about water, or soda, or NFL Pro Shop jerseys? Soda, for example (I mention this because a man in one of our photos was holding a 12-pask of RC cola) provides both water and carbohydrates. Jerseys could be worn or sold at some point to make money for other items. People in New Orleans have acted like animals. But most of us will never have to face the scenario of having absolutely nothing. No food, no water, no home or job to go to, only the clothes on your back.

Within the AP controversy, I feel they should have been more consistent. If two—in this case three—people are doing the same thing, either it's looting or it's not. Looting is a morally loaded term, but probably accurate in describing this situation.

Within my work at Boston.com, I tried to opt for more descriptive language when possible. But, when you have room for a one-word summary on a "more info" box, well, what else would you call it?

The caption controversy is small change compared to the upcoming debates about emergency response, the behavior of the victims, and how race played into each. I can only hope the "blogosphere" treats it as such.